I really do not appreciate your sarcasm.
Well, then maybe next, when you publically tear apart somebody of Hoffmann's magnitude you might 1) think about historical context, 2) understand the style (both of romantic pianism of that era and also of that of Chopin), 3) consider the fact that artists are judged by their highest achievements, and 4) have enough humility not to start judging, pretending you know what's right and what's wrong.
Rachmaninoff... was very open with compliments and appreciated other pianists.
I'd suggest to study the topic little deeper, particularly read Rachmaninov's letters and memoirs about him. You will be quite surprised as for your findings.
In any case, the fact Rachmaninov dedicated his 3rd Concerto to Hoffmann, as well as called him "Pianist number One" speaks little more that just giving a mere compliment.
I was talking about Pollini who studied in Milano and we are talking about the Chopin etudes. I would appreciate it if you would tone it down a little bit and be aware of what are debating on before replying to me.
Sorry, from your original message it was extremely unclear that you were debating about Pollini, as his name was not mentioned anywhere in that post. All the reference I saw was "his". Since we were talking about Hoffmann I believe it was fair to assume you were referencing to him. Of course, I think it is understandable I had no idea that in fact, you were referencing to Pollini (again, since his name was not in that message at all). I am not sure how I'd be aware of what is "debating on" and what do you mean by "tone it down" in respect to that?
As for Hoffman I stated my opinion that I do not like him as a pianist and I showed exactly why. No need to get all defensive.
First of all, it seems in fact, it were you, who was defensive... but this is not of importance.
All I can say, even though it is your right not to like Hoffmann (and of course, it is your right), that man was an important part of our past. Moreover, I can say I don't like some aspects about his playing myself. However, it really does not matter, as the main thing is to understand that historically, he was a titanic figure... God of piano, somebody of probably... Michael Jackson's stature of that time. In a sense, Hoffmann was a bridge to a modern pianism.
Without understanding this, without coming back to his recordings, listening, rewinding and listening again, analyzing, thinking, trying to understand what was so special about him, what made him to be a cult for entire generation... without all of that we cannot understand piano and piano performance of today, as (as we all aware) without knowing our past and understanding history we cannot understand today and go into tomorrow.